list_saved_resume_searches

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It responsibly states the auth requirement (HH_ACCESS_TOKEN) and employer-account scoping, and 'List' implies a read operation. It does not go deeper into error conditions, rate limits, or role requirements, but for a simple list operation this is acceptable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core verb and resource, then the essential auth requirement. No filler and every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a paginated list with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description plus schema gives an agent enough to invoke it correctly. It could be more complete by mentioning the distinction from get_saved_resume_search, but nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with raw, page, and per_page each documented. The description adds no parameter-level nuance beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the resource ('saved resume searches') and the operation ('List'), scoped to 'current employer account.' It is clear and specific, though it does not explicitly contrast with the singular sibling get_saved_resume_search, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The context is clear: use it to list saved resume searches for the current employer account, and it notes a required token. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over get_saved_resume_search or other alternatives; the usage is mostly implied by the resource name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.